This is literally the single worst analogy I have ever read because A) only a complete and utter moron would base probablity on mean and not mode. Like, I cannot comprehend how stupid someone would have to be to make such an error and B) obviously a dice roll is the definition of a random event. Even if you rolled a 6 on a 6-sided dice 10,000 times in a roll the odds you'd roll a 6 on #10,001 is still 1/6. Comparing a weighted, statistical model (such as say... PECOTA) to a truly random event shows a real and fundamental lack of understanding of statistics and probability.

Clearly you are unfamiliar with the concept of an "analogy". An analogy is not meant to compare two situations in every possible way. Obviously baseball is not random, and PECOTA is not merely a bunch of averages. That isn't the point. I am not trivializing the difference between "weighted statistical models" and random events any more than I would be trivializing the difference between fish and mammals if I were to say sharks:teeth::whales:baleen. Obviously, These two animals are very different in many ways. The analogy would be pointing out nothing more than the fact that teeth and baleen are located in the same place on the animal's anatomy--AND NOTHING MORE. It does not imply that they serve the same purpose or that they are made of the same material (they don't, and they're not).

I realize that I've just used an analogy to explain the concept of analogies, but bear with me.

Likewise, my die analogy does not imply that PECOTA is nothing more than arithmetic means. I will spell it out for you again: The analogy is that in both the case of the die roll, and the case of executives who place a lot of weight on PECOTA projections, you have a person who is basing an important decision purely on numbers, where there are other factors at play. In the case of the die, the other factor is that 3.5 is not a number on a die. In the case of PECOTA, the other factors are various--managers, team chemistry, fan support, etc, etc.
In a way though, you did grasp my point--guessing 3.5 as a die roll is obviously absurdly stupid. I'm arguing that basing baseball decisions PURELY on numbers is also pretty damn stupid, if not as stupid as the former.

Yes. Anybody have a picture of him with his shirt off? Really I don't want to denigrate him. He's a gifted athlete. He's one of those heavy set people who are nevertheless athletic.

I don't think anyone is trying to denigrate him. But the man is overweight, and to suggest he isn't, and that he's only as big as he is due to diet and muscle is absurd. I remember the first time I saw him. It was on MTV when they had a softball challenge. His dad played, and in the later innings, as a kid, he played. I believe he caught the last out, and if not, one of the final outs. he was a large boy then. He's a large man now. And it isn't all muscle. I give him credit, that as big as he is, he is a gifted athlete, as you have said. But eventually, that weight will take it's toll.

__________________

A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives- Jackie Robinson

Well, if THIS isn't enough to make you flush BP and PECOTA down the crapper, I don't know what will, but I discovered that PECOTA has pegged both the Sox and the North Side Pathetics with the SAME 77-85 record!!!

Me, I am hoping to see the Cubs go back-to-back on 100 losses, but for PECOTA to predict the same record for both teams? Meh

I love the "anything I don't like to hear means lets lace 'em up and see" attitude. Like that attitude alone could make a bad team good.

It's information. Use it or dismiss it. But have a reason. Call Bowden a moron for all I care. But have a reason.

The reason is that all these guys are almost always not just wrong, but very wrong. They can't predict who will win half the divisions on September 1, muchless on Feb 12.

Go ahead and find people and numbers to cite your anti-Hahn/Sox agenda. But at the end of the day, 162 games will be played and not a person on this planet can tell you what will happen to any degree of accuracy

Ugh. Saying a team had a good or bad offseason is not saying they'll win their divisions. For example, a team that is projected to be really great could have barely done anything in the offseason, or even lost a key player, and finish near the bottom of "best offseasons," but still be projected to finish first. The opposite holds true, too.

I still stand by my theory that the only reason many here dislike predictions and projections is because they rarely rate the Sox high in such prognostications. I bet Yankee fans love predictions.

Ignoring the fact that most people are aware that PECOTA Team Projections are more or less a fun exercise in statistical modeling and not to be taken as serious, carved in stone predictions, if you're measuring their accuracy against actual W-L record you've already demonstronstrated your ignorance as to what this projection is actually measuring. Just in case you wonder why nobody ever cares about your ERRRGH STANDARD DEVIATION argument.

Ugh. Saying a team had a good or bad offseason is not saying they'll win their divisions. For example, a team that is projected to be really great could have barely done anything in the offseason, or even lost a key player, and finish near the bottom of "best offseasons," but still be projected to finish first. The opposite holds true, too.

I still stand by my theory that the only reason many here dislike predictions and projections is because they rarely rate the Sox high in such prognostications. I bet Yankee fans love predictions.

I just think telling everyone who had the best and worst offseason without any games being played is silly. The best time to determine who really had the best and worst offseason will be around Halloween.

When Bowden, just like everyone else, comes up with his predicted order of finish before the season starts, at the end of the year, you will see a couple he was correct with, and a whole bunch he couldn't have been more wrong. It's why I find these team projections and rankings of offseasons so humerous. No one really knows.

And I don't think BP is a joke. I think their individual player projections are interesting and I'm a yearly customer. But I'm never going to get worked up over some of these rankings.

I am going to come back to this thread at the end of April and see how many people who hate projections and say we should play out the string before we analyze are also going nuts over the performance of our Sox over the first month, basically throwing in the towel or printing World Series tickets. Just wondering if there will be a correlation.

I just think telling everyone who had the best and worst offseason without any games being played is silly. The best time to determine who really had the best and worst offseason will be around Halloween.

When Bowden, just like everyone else, comes up with his predicted order of finish before the season starts, at the end of the year, you will see a couple he was correct with, and a whole bunch he couldn't have been more wrong. It's why I find these team projections and rankings of offseasons so humerous. No one really knows.

No, but there are agreements among experts that will be true. The Tigers will win our division. Handily. The experts all agree. And it will happen. It's as close to a sure thing as there is. Sure as for a long stretch, the Yanks won their division. And everyone picked them to do so as well. Because they were just so much better than everyone else. And their division. And it was a no brainer.

The Tigers are the best team in baseball. Maybe that's debatable, but to most people that's clear.. We are fighting to stay middle of the pack, talent-wise, in a division that got better around us. That's debatable too, but to most people that's clear. I have no trouble believing we aren't winning the division. It's as closer to impossible as it is to possible. A lot closer.